Research commissioned by Bayer Animal Health has revealed that dogs really do look like their owners.

The research, which is being used to promote Drontal Bone, the company's new bone-shaped wormer, was conducted amongst 3,000 British dog-lovers. It found that the overwhelming majority of owners share at least one common physical attribute with their pet, whilst one in ten owners could be described as the spitting image of their dog, sharing six or more physical attributes:

• 27% of petite owners have small or toy dogs.
• 29% of overweight owners admit their dog also carries a few extra pounds
• 12% of owners and canines were mutually described as obese
• 61% of dogs with closely cropped fur, such as Jack Russells and Boxers, have owners sporting short hair styles
• 26% of people with long locks also owns a canine with tumbling tresses, such as an Afghan Hound or Shih Tzu.
• 19% of owners with curly of frizzy hair own a dog with similar tresses such as a Labradoodle or Bichon Frise.
• 34% of dark-haired mutts also has an owner with brown or black tresses, with the same amount of light haired humans sharing the tone with their pooch.
• 29% of owners with highlights or lowlights owns a mutt with tri-colour fur
• 23% of dogs with grey hair have owners with matching locks, such as a Schnauzer.
• 47% of dogs and owners were described as friendly and playful
• 39% admit that their dog is as grumpy as them.
• 25% of canines have inherited their owner's timid personality
• 16% admit they both have a naughty side.

As part of the campaign, Bayer has launched the Give Your Dog a Bone competition, a nationwide search to find the UK's "Top Dog". The competition is split into four video and photographic categories, with one open exclusively to dogs that have formed a special bond with their owner. Top dogs can enter via the competition website - www.giveyourdogabone.co.uk - where owners can upload photos, videos, and explain in under 100 words why they think their pet should win a Drontal 'Bonies' award.

Give Your Dog a Bone Judge Emma Milne MRCVS, said: "When dogs seem to have the same characteristics as their owners, it could be because people subconsciously choose a pet that resembles themselves. It is often found that more energetic breeds, such as s Red Setter have an owner who is sporty and most happy when taking their pet on long country walks, while a glamorous owner who enjoys grooming themselves might choose a dog which also requires lots preening, such as a Maltese Terrier. The Give Your Dog a Bone awards give us the chance to recognise the unique traits and talents that make dogs such an important part of our lives. With four very different categories, this competition will be wide open to dogs of all shapes, sizes and personalities!"

Virbac Animal Health has announced that its medical castration implant Suprelorin 9.4mg has received a marketing authorisation for use in ferrets.

The neutering of male ferrets (hobs) is recommended to suppress fertility, decrease odour and reduce territorial aggressive behaviour and urinary marking¹. According to Virbac, Suprelorin offers temporary sterilisation but without the need for surgery, and its use prevents the high Luteinizing hormone (LH)/Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels which occur following surgery and which can play a role in the development of hyperadrenocorticism².

Suprelorin is a slow-release implant containing the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist deslorelin. Once injected under the skin of healthy, sexually mature and entire ferrets, the continuous low release of deslorelin from the implant causes an interruption of the HPA circuit, leading to a reduction in LH/ FSH levels and therefore testosterone production. This results in a reduction of libido, spermatogenesis and testicle size.

The implant lasts for up to four years, at which stage the ferret can be re-implanted to maintain the effect.

Chris Geddes MRCVS, Virbac Product Manager, said: "For owners looking for a surgery-free route to the castration of male ferrets and the problems it can cause, Suprelorin provides a simple and effective alternative."

Suprelorin 4.7mg has been available for use in dogs since 2008. Suprelorin 9.4mg was launched in 2011.

For further information, please contact your Territory Manager or call Head Office on 01359 243243.

References:

1. Mullen H. Soft Tissue Surgery. In Hillyer EV, Quesenberry KE, editors. Ferrets, rabbits, and rodents: clinical medicine and surgery. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1996. P 131-144.
2. Schoemaker NJ, Schuurmans M, Moorman H, Lumeij JT. Correlation between age at neutering and age at onset of hyperadrenocorticismin ferrets. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000; 216: 195-7.

The RCVS has released the photograph of a man apprehended by Wiltshire police whilst working as a bogus veterinary surgeon at a practice in Swindon.

Peter Keniry, who had been practising under the name of a properly qualified and legitimately registered veterinary surgeon Shaun Kehoe, was arrested on 23 August and appeared in Swindon Magistrates' Court on charges of fraud and practising veterinary surgery unlawfully.  He was released on bail.

Mr Keniry is no stranger to the College or the police, and has already been dealt with in 1998, 2001 and 2005 for similar offences. On each occasion, Mr Keniry has impersonated a member of the College whose name is legitimately on the Register, which makes it difficult even for practices that do check the credentials of prospective employees.

Gordon Hockey, Head of Professional Conduct and Assistant Registrar at the RCVS said: "We were alerted to the potential fraud on 23 August and immediately liaised with the police to facilitate Mr Keniry's arrest that same day. The next day, RCVS Council member Dr Bob Moore and I visited Swindon police station to assist the police.

"It appears that Mr Keniry has continued his pattern of re-offending, and we hope that by publicising his photograph any other practice that has employed him recently will recognise him and contact the RCVS Professional Conduct Department, and potential employers and locum agencies will keep his photograph to reduce the chances of this happening again."

The RCVS Professional Conduct Department can be contacted on: profcon@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0789.

UK veterinary surgeons strongly prefer recommending branded treatments, according to a survey conducted by specialist advertising agency Masius.

The survey, conducted amongst members of www.vetsurgeon.org, received 725 responses. It gave a conclusive insight to veterinary surgeons' opinions on branding, with 87% of respondents saying that they prefer to recommend a branded POM-V over a generic equivalent.

While branded treatments are clearly preferred over generics, vets recognise that higher prices can be an issue for clients. Price is justified mainly through a higher level of trust in the quality of the product (through extensive trialling). They also cite the added support in the event of client usage issues and the value that clients attach to brands. The cascade is a further factor, requiring the use of licensed drugs.

When it comes to supplements, vets are still in favour of brands, but less so - as the cascade is not a factor. On the issue of price differential, most vets felt that a premium of 10-25% is justifiable for a brand over a generic.

Jonathan Posner, Business Director at Masius said: "As well as the quantitative data, we also got some interesting qualitative comments as well. Looking at these, one can see a range of opinions - from the vets who value the easier client acceptance of brands, to those who feel that their professional care of the patient is paramount and that a generic should be used where it delivers the same benefit as a brand. Client ability to pay was also mentioned as a factor - a generic being more likely to lead to compliance for a client on a tight budget."

The fact that branded products come with better information and marketing support was agreed by the large majority (93%) of respondents.

All the participants in the survey were entered into a draw to win an iPad 2. The winner of the draw was Megan Wood MRCVS (pictured right) from Fife. She said: "The iPad is brilliant; I love it, and am a lucky lady!"

RCVS President, Dr Jerry Davies, has committed to prioritise the establishment of a new Audit and Risk Committee, following publication of the recommendations of a report into two overspends at the College.

Earlier this year, outgoing President Peter Jinman had announced that a review would be carried out into the circumstances that led to higher-than-expected expenditure on the College's new database and building development works in the Lower Ground Floor at Belgravia House.

The RCVS Officer team asked Professor Bill McKelvey - a member of the College's Governance Review Group - and two of the College's Privy Council-appointed Council members to look at all aspects that related to its budgeting and expenditure process of those projects, and propose lessons that should be learned.

Dr Davies said: "That such a review was required is regretted, but I would like to thank Professor McKelvey, Richard Davis and Judith Webb for their diligence in this work. Their recommendations will be a very helpful addition to the work that is currently underway to ensure corporate governance is fit for purpose and, in particular, that the management of capital projects within the College is optimised."

The full Overspend Report (one sentence was redacted on legal advice) was considered by Council at its meeting on 3 November. Council agreed that the recommendations should be made public. The College is currently seeking further legal advice on whether it is proper for the report to be made available under the Freedom of Information Act.

Dr Davies added: "The recommendations of the report are under consideration by a group of five past Presidents, together with Richard Davis and Judith Webb as lay members of Council, under the Chairmanship of Peter Jinman, and their proposals will be considered by Council in due course.

"The recommendation that an Audit and Risk Committee be set up will be prioritised, as this was highlighted as an imperative. Other related activities, such as the development of a protocol for the management of major projects, had already been put in place by Officers prior to the overspend review."

Regarding the two projects at the heart of the report, the College says building work in the Lower Ground Floor at Belgravia House has been complete for some time and the new rooms and their facilities are being used, particularly when Disciplinary Committee hearings render much of the rest of the building out of bounds. The new data management system is also in use and an external consultant is currently looking at the work that has been carried out so far, and will make recommendations for the future.

"Meanwhile, although there are many lessons to be learned from the report, it's business as usual in terms of bringing to a conclusion many of our important ongoing initiatives, such as the introduction of the new Code of Professional Conduct, the consultations on the recommendations of the Specialisation Working Party and a draft Performance Protocol, and, of course, the ongoing work of the Disciplinary and Preliminary Investigation Committees," said Dr Davies.

The recommendations of the report, which were adopted by Council, can be downloaded from www.rcvs.org.uk/McKelvey.

The RVN Disciplinary Committee of the RCVS has removed an Armagh-based nurse from the Register after finding that she'd entered the details of four injections into clinical records when she had no reasonable basis for doing so.

During the four-day hearing, the Committee considered two alternative charges against Ms Tracy Nicholl (nee Wilson) relating to her actions on 3 February 2011, whilst employed by O'Reilly & Fee veterinary surgery, Armagh.

Ms Nicholl was alleged by the College to have administered Dolethal, a pink liquid containing pentabarbitone and used for euthanasia, to a dog called Butch without being directed to do so. It was also alleged that she had made dishonest entries into the dog's clinical records, or had administered drugs without a veterinary surgeon's prescription.

Ms Nicholl was alleged to have administered the Dolethal via a fluid bag and giving set on the morning of 3 February, which she denied. The Committee found that, although a veterinary surgeon believed that she saw pink fluid in the line, uncertainties in the surrounding circumstances made the Committee unable to be sure the line contained pink liquid. Expert and forensic evidence revealed Butch had received Dolethal, but not the route of administration or the timing. Therefore the Committee could not be sure Ms Nicholl administered the Dolethal and dismissed this charge.

However, the Committee found that Ms Nicholl did enter on Butch's clinical records that four drugs had been injected, when she had neither administered them nor been told that the drugs had been administered. Although she denied making the entries in evidence submitted to the hearing, in evidence from an interview with the College on 11 July 2011 she had admitted this and her initials were on the record entries.

The Committee noted these injections would be chargeable, and was satisfied the public would regard making these incorrect entries as dishonest. As Ms Nicholl was a highly experienced, senior nurse who also lectured to veterinary nursing students, the Committee was sure she knew she was acting dishonestly. Further, she had breached her responsibilities to clients by failing to maintain accurate case records, and the entries raised potential animal welfare issues. In mitigation, her actions affected no animal's actual welfare, and there was no evidence that Ms Nicholl had made any financial gain or repeated her conduct.

Ms Judith Webb, chairing and speaking on behalf of the Committee, said: "In addition to the fact that the charge involved dishonesty, there were a number of other aggravating features. The Respondent has not demonstrated any recognition of the seriousness of the record entry allegation, specifically the importance of keeping proper records ... It is in the wider public interest and to protect the reputation of the veterinary nursing profession that the Respondent's name should be removed from the Register."

Ms Nicholl is the first Registered Veterinary Nurse to be struck off since the introduction of the title.

Kruuse has announced that it is to become the exclusive veterinary distributor in Europe for Kit4Cat, a globally patented hydrophobic sand for veterinary use.

Kit4Cat is a biodegradable sand with a natural non-toxic urine repelling coating which allows veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and cat owners to collect a urine sample for urinalysis without resorting to more invasive procedures. Kit4Cat is put in the cat's normal litter tray, whereupon it repels rather than absorbs the urine, allowing it to be collected with a pipette.

Andrew Groom, Managing Director, Kruuse UK Ltd., said: "This exciting agreement and product range further expands Kruuse's small animal product portfolio with its customers in Scandinavia, mainland Europe and the UK; increasing the already extensive range of feline products available to the veterinary practitioner."

Daniel Levitt, BA, MSM, CEO, Co-Founder & Board Member of Coastline Global, the makers of Kit4Cat, said: "This agreement will further expand our products presence within the veterinary industry, using Kruuse's strong relationships within veterinary practices, to promote less stressful ways of urine test collection prior to diagnosis and treatment of cats."

The British Veterinary Association has responded to 'alarmist' headlines linking contact with cats to schizophrenia due to the risks posed by the parasite Toxoplasma gondii.

The report in today's Independent contains some important messages regarding the need for good personal hygiene and the need for pregnant women and immuno-compromised groups to be aware of the risks. However, the BVA says it is concerned that the headlines could cause significant alarm to cat owners.

Most people who become infected are asymptomatic but 10-20% can show transient symptoms which are flu-like. There is a more serious risk to pregnant women and those who are immuno-compromised, but as with all infections common sense and good personal hygiene reduces the risk significantly and the BVA says there is no reason that families with, or those intending to have, children shouldn't have pet cats.

As outlined in the article sources of infection include eating undercooked meat and vegetables that have not been washed properly and contact with cats. It is not known which the greater source of infection is but according to the BVA, anecdotal evidence suggests that meat is likely to be more important than contact with cats. The BVA says it echoes advice that meat should be prepared and cooked properly, and offers the following hygiene advice for cat owners:

• Wash hands after handling a cat
• Do not allow children near cat litter trays
• Ensure faeces in cat litter is removed promptly and disposed of where people cannot be contaminated by it 
• Pregnant women should avoid cleaning out litter trays and use protective gloves if they cannot avoid it

BVA Past President and veterinary surgeon Harvey Locke said: "While the facts are true, the headlines in this story have been quite alarmist and we are very keen to reassure cat owners that the risks can be managed with good basic hygiene and common sense.

"The biggest threat is to pregnant women and those who are immuno-compromised, which we have known for some time. It is useful to reiterate that they should take extra care but there is no need for people to get rid of their pet cats or choose not to have cats as pets."

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against a veterinary surgeon said to have been dishonest in claims made against insurance following a dog's veterinary treatment.

At the end of the four-day hearing, the Committee found Sheena Brimelow, formerly employed by Kinver Veterinary Practice in Kinver, Stourbridge, not guilty of charges relating to seven insurance claims submitted between 1 January 2008 and 1 October 2009. These related to her parent's dog, a Cairn terrier, which she had treated at her then employer's practice. Ms Brimelow admitted that she had submitted invoices with her claims showing the retail prices for several items, when she had paid the practice only the cost prices. She said that she had deleted records from the practice computer showing the retail prices so that the ingoings and outgoings in the practice finances were accurate.

The Committee considered whether Ms Brimelow had either behaved dishonestly or, in the alternative, ought to have known not to have included the sums she did in the insurance claims forms. The Committee found that Ms Brimelow was an honest and reliable witness. She had explained openly what she had done, entirely consistently, from the first time the allegations had been put to her by the practice owner. It noted that an insurance company representative also considered her actions to be "a genuine misunderstanding," although subsequently a complaint was made by the insurance company to the College about Ms Brimelow's actions. The Committee found there were no clear guidelines in the practice as to how staff insurance claims should be handled. It also felt that, as a result of the insurer's communications failures, it was not difficult to believe that Ms Brimelow was unaware of how claims concerning the insured pets of veterinary practice staff members were expected to be handled.

From the evidence presented in the hearing, the Committee calculated that Ms Brimelow had benefited by only £90.50. The Committee noted that she had offered to repay any monies to her employer or the insurer, and that the insurer's loss adjusters had thought this was a matter for Ms Brimelow and her employer. The College had also referred the matter to the police, who said it was not in the public interest to proceed with the matter, a decision they based on the low value of the loss and Ms Brimelow's offer to pay back the money.

Professor Peter Lees, chairing and speaking on behalf of the Committee said: "The Committee notes the reasons given by the police for undertaking no criminal investigation in this case, and agrees with that analysis. The Committee must apply the same standard of proof as would have been applied in a criminal case. In all the circumstances, the Committee is far short of being satisfied so that it is sure that Ms Brimelow acted dishonestly in this case."

"The Committee considers that [Ms Brimelow] was naïve and misguided in handling the insurance claims in the way that she did," he continued. "However, the Committee considers there was a lack of proper guidance within the practice as to how staff insurance claims should be handled. In these circumstances the Committee is not sure that the College has proved that the Respondent ought to have known that she should not have included sums on the claims form, which did not represent the costs that she had incurred."

Both elements of the charge were accordingly dismissed.

The RCVS DC has directed that a Wirral-based veterinary surgeon should be removed from the Register after finding that he had treated clients badly, kept inadequate clinical records, was dishonest in dealing with the RCVS, and that animals in his care were placed at risk.

At the end of the five-day hearing, the Committee found that Ian Beveridge, of the Daryl Veterinary Centre, Heswall, was guilty of charges relating to two separate cases: one concerning a crossbred bitch named Holly, who belonged to Mr and Mrs Flanagan and was treated in February 2011; and the other, a cat called Blu, belonging to Ms Simpson and treated in March 2010.

On the morning of 23 February 2011, Holly was admitted to the Daryl Veterinary Centre in a collapsed state with a swollen abdomen. The Committee found a proper assessment should have led Mr Beveridge to perform an abdominocentesis at the practice, the results of which, in view of the practice and its facilities, would inevitably have led to Holly immediately being referred elsewhere. However, the Committee heard that Mr Beveridge simply placed her on a heat pad for observation until about midday, something it considered no reasonably competent veterinary surgeon in general practice would have done. The Committee also found that, on more than one occasion, Mr Beveridge had refused to discuss referral with Mrs Flanagan, and this amounted to failing to treat her with courtesy and respect as required by the RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct 2010, which applied at that time. Holly was ultimately referred elsewhere and survived. The Committee also found the records of Holly's admission to be completely inadequate.

Blu was presented on 22 March 2010 in a collapsed state by Mr Taylor, Ms Simpson's former partner with whom the cat lived. The Committee found that Mr Taylor was told that the cat would be kept on a heat pad, that no other treatment or diagnosis was discussed, and that the possibility of euthanasia was not raised. Having been unable to contact Mr Beveridge that evening, Ms Simpson went to the practice the following morning, intending that her cat be discharged and taken elsewhere. However, the Committee found, when Mr Beveridge eventually fetched Blu, who had died, he blocked Mrs Simpson's exit from the consulting room, saying words to the effect that had she been a better owner, none of this would have happened.

Mr Beveridge also sent to the College clinical records for Blu detailing a blood sample taken at 19.00 on 22 March, and subcutaneous fluids administered during that night. The Committee found this to contain deliberately false information in order to cast a better light on his management of Blu and that he was dishonest; the document was essentially a fabrication to enhance his own interests.

In reaching its decision, the Committee said that it made allowances for the fact that Mr Beveridge operated in first-opinion practice at a basic level. Notwithstanding this, however, it found him guilty of a very serious failure of care to both patients, which gave rise to serious risks to their safety and welfare.

Professor Peter Lees, chairing and speaking on behalf of the Committee said: "On each occasion [Mr Beveridge] treated the owners with a lack of courtesy and respect and made the difficult and distressing circumstances in which they found themselves much worse than they need have been. The Committee takes a very serious view of his attempt to prevent Ms Simpson leaving the consulting room with Blu, and of the unjust and upsetting way in which he sought to blame her for the animal's death. He showed her no consideration at all. Likewise his refusal to contemplate referral for Holly until compelled by Mrs Flanagan to do so and his persistent refusal to engage with her about this at all was, in the Committee's view, reprehensible."

The Committee directed Mr Beveridge's name should be removed from the Register.

An article by Consultant Biologist Clifford Warwick DipMedSci CBiol CSci EurProBiol FOCAE FSB in the current issue of the Journal of AWSELVA (the Animal Welfare Science, Ethics and Law Veterinary Association) is calling for greater scrutiny of the relationship between the veterinary profession and exotic pet trading.

The article, entitled 'Veterinary accountability and the exotic pet trade', was co-authored by biologist Catrina Steedman BSc(Hons) MSB and veterinary surgeon Emma Nicholas MA VetMB MRCVS

The authors accuse some vets of serving their own vested financial interests by directly aligning themselves with exotic pet trading. They say that these vets are effectively causing the wild-capture and intensive breeding, cramped storage, transport and sale of hundreds of thousands of fish, amphibians, reptiles and other animals.

The article points to scientific evidence showing that stress, disease and premature mortality commonly accompanies 'wild pets' at all stages of the trade and private keeping process.

The authors argue that promoting the trade in exotic animals runs counter to the veterinary profession's obligation to provide impartial guidance for the benefit of animal health and welfare, and that the issue of vets selling or promoting exotics in the home requires greater scrutiny for possible conflicts of interest and for contributing to harmful practices.

Lead author, Clifford Warwick DipMedSci CBiol CSci EurProBiol FOCAE FSB said: "By their nature, vets want to be and are obliged to be part of a solution to animal and human health and welfare matters. That a vet might have a hand in selling or promoting exotic pets is, in my view, tantamount to being part of a problem. And whether or not that represents a formal conflict of interest or questionable practice, I think the spotlight will continue focusing until there are no shaded areas."

He added: "In my view, the avoidance of unnecessary harm is a general responsibility we should all share, but I think veterinarians, like some other professionals, have a special responsibility in this regard. However, unnecessary harm is largely unavoidable with the exotic pet business. Whether wild-caught or captive-bred, animal suffering, species and environmental degradation, and public health concerns frequently go hand-in-hand with all stages of exotic pet trading and keeping practices."

Co-author Catrina Steedman BSc(Hons) MSB said: "Many vets are understandably critical of the exotic pet trade and its minefield of animal welfare, public health and environmental problems. It is unfortunate that a few vets, possibly with vested interests, feel it is appropriate to condone and even promote a trade that has such obvious negative consequences for animals and people."

Co-author, Emma Nicholas MA VetMB MRCVS said: "Vets have a responsibility to be approachable and impartial; animal welfare and also public health must be their priorities at all times. I believe it is pertinent that as a profession, we open the discussion as to how we best improve the welfare (health and quality of life) of existing exotic pets, and also educate and inform potential owners of "wild" or exotic animals of the associated welfare and public health considerations."

The article concludes that vets should '...occupy a detached position with no interest in the success or failure of the 'business' of exotic pet-keeping' and that 'any vet who recommends or endorses buying or keeping an exotic pet arguably imparts guidance that is not fully consistent with ensuring good animal welfare or human health'.

On the 15th anniversary of the foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak, the BVA has emphasised the vital role of vets and veterinary surveillance in protecting the UK from devastating disease outbreaks.

The outbreak (confirmed in an abattoir on 19 February 2001) involved the slaughter of more than six million animals causing dire emotional and financial impacts on farmers, vets and rural businesses. Vets from across the profession, including those not working with livestock, were called upon to assist with disease control.

BVA is marking the anniversary by asking the government to reflect on the vital role of vets and veterinary surveillance after Defra was asked to make a further 15% budget cut in last year’s Autumn Statement (November 2015). 

BVA President Sean Wensley said: "15 years on from the devastation of the 2001 outbreak the UK must remain vigilant for Foot and Mouth Disease, but important lessons learned mean we are now better prepared if another outbreak does occur. Today we would have an immediate standstill on livestock movements, improved traceability systems and the possibility of using vaccination as part of the overall control strategy. But we cannot be complacent and the anniversary is an opportunity to reflect on the vital role of vets and veterinary surveillance in protecting the UK from disease.

"In recent years we have seen the impact of significant cuts to Defra's budget on veterinary fees for TB testing and other OV services. Vets’ frontline roles must be recognised and supported, backed up by an effective, coordinated system of data capture that will enable us to make the necessary links to detect and control new disease threats. We can never be free from the risk of disease, and in recent years the emergence of Schmallenberg and re-emergence of Bluetongue have brought new challenges. It is essential that we have the coordination and capability to identify and diagnose in order to protect our national herd and flock."